* Leaving cert history - predictions / aftermath * (1 thread please)

Gav77

Seems im about the only one happy with that paper:D Well apart from coleraine not coming up! Managed to write some pants on the app boys!

Did:
Northern ireland impact
Nazi State
Vietnam

Had good essays on CnG and Montgomery but the question wording kinda freaked me out so left them off!

ChristinaIndigo

Well...that was a fail. Absolutely gutted...

Iceboy

Gutted with the paper, almost everything i studied didn't come up or got contradicted

for example:

I studied all about moon landings and America entered the space race. The Q that cameup was about the aftermath....

I studied all the reasons for america entering Vietnam, The Q came up why did America lose Vietnam...

I studied N.Ireland during and after world war II, Q came up on Northern Ireland before WWII and during it

feel so hard done by, the other questions were awful aswell, only decent one was characteristics of nazi state

hope to god I passed

babynice

It wasn't too bad!

The documents, Irish and European was grand. My American section was a disgrace, I only wrote about a page and a half about Martin Luther King. Better than nothing though

Daniel S

malachyscott wrote: »

Your joking right ? There's so guarantee in any subject. You weren't screwed by anyone. Its your own fault if you weren't prepared.

Those were the things I wanted to come up. Obviously I studied the other things.... :rolleyes:

thunderthreads

I'm soooo happy with it!

The document q's were a bit dodgy tbh though, Q.3 was seriously annoying!
I studied to App. Boys well so I was grand!

I did Arthur Griffith, Martin Luther K and Stalin/Lenin... so happy!

martyllia

i did de Valera(2 pages only ) Nazi (best q ever! delighted with it!) and Martin Luther King ... MBB and threw few marches and demonstartions ,but didn't have time to finish it and the Apprentice Boys... ugh...i think i still got half marks for the context q

Eggy Baby!

I did Topic 3 and 6 in Section 3 and Topic 3 in Section 2..

I was so disappointed with the American questions...way too broad but Topic 3 was good.. I was running out of time so I managed 2 and a half pages, on the characteristics of the Nazi state, of shloppy shtuff- Ireland was good and I did grand on it...punched the air when the apprentice bois came up for the document question and THANK GOD i did some stuff out of an extra topic..thank god! I did the run-up to WW1 in industry in Tsarist Russia in Topic 2 in case the American questions were bad...the American questions WERE bad and the run up to WW1 came up in topic 2! God loves me!

But anyone else think that the document questions demanded FAR too long-winded answers? I spent an hour on that bloody thing, and 45 minutes on the Irish question in comparison.

C__MC

Very good paper did northern ireland question what did people write here before the war?? it through me off but did 4 pages any way. did 5 each for king and mussolini delighted!!

Ash_M

Eggy Baby! wrote: »

But anyone else think that the document questions demanded FAR too long-winded answers? I spent an hour on that bloody thing, and 45 minutes on the Irish question in comparison.

Yeah, I felt my answer to Q 3 (a) was nearly too long, but I didn't want to cut anything short either..

thunderthreads

^
Yes! The document q's were horrific haha!

polka dot

I honestly have no idea how I got 3 and a half pages (4's my normal) out of de Valera's strengths and weaknesses. The only Irish history stuff I had studied was Belfast.

Did not mention Belfast once.

I just kept saying he was an idiot/inept and that he was stubborn and wanted his own way :rolleyes: Oh but his strength was he's cunning and determined. Literally just wrote about the Anglo-Irish Treaty, start to finish... from de Valera's point of view! Also said at the start that he was never in the country.

Dayum Irish history. Dictatorship and democracy was okay because I'd studied every single aspect I had on Germany so that was fine. DELIGHTED Martin Luther King came up by himself. Absolutely hate the Boycott.

Managed to get through the Document by using the paragraphs to jog my memory :rolleyes:

Bit all over the place but I think it went okay. I hope so anyway.

Fireball07

I couldn't say I was happy.

In the end the document was okay...maybe a bit bare on facts but I was proud of my arguments.

Chracteristics of Nazi State was grand really- not sure if economic policy should have been there because I didn't mention it.

Irish- Did De Valera, may have been a mistake, topic is very broad. I basically wrote a Fianna Fáil essay just talking about him instead. Not linked very well either, I know.

America- I did the Vietnam/Moon Landing one but I didn't know anything about the moon landing really so I just did Vietnam. It was okay...maybe lacked a point for a final paragraph but I thought it was decent.

It could have been a lot nicer. The Irish question was slightly dodgy- I would have done Cumann na nGaedhael but I was put off because I couldn't remember that act that forced Fianna Fáil TDs to enter Dáil (if it's the electoral amendment act I'll be angry)

Sean25

so happy with that paper went well! filled my answer book and everything, i know its not quantity but im happy with the quality i put in

AdamD

For the most part, it is actually quantity.

SDTimeout

Did anybody attempt turning a Sinn Fein question into the Arthur Griffith Q ?

PaddyP056

GSI wrote: »

That was a Cnut of a paper. If I wrote about racial conflict with Martin luther kings name through it, would I get any marks?:/

ye thats basically what I did too, just talked about montgomery bus boycott,selma,birmingham,selma and his speech couldnt think of anything else really. You should get most marks ye

Mr Mime

I wasnt too happy with it but I was alot better off than other people in my year...

I did
consolidation of democracy
tensions in europe 1871 1914
and the nazi state

I finished with literally 5 seconds left and I used up the whole answer booj but I really hope the examiner can read my writing

Gav77

C__MC wrote: »

Very good paper did northern ireland question what did people write here before the war?? it through me off but did 4 pages any way. did 5 each for king and mussolini delighted!!

Just wrote about the economy, shipbuilding, textiles etc...that is pretty much the war though so just wrote from 39-45...welfare state and that! Didnt really know anything from 32-39! what you write??

Meller

I thought the paper was nice enough, though I wasn't prepared for Apprentice Boys.

Couldn't go wrong with the European Section, and Arthur Griffith, Patrick Pearse, Countess M...?! BEAUTIFUL! I knew zilch about the last two but managed to get four or five paragraphs out of them combined, which helps to bring up the cumulative mark.


For Martin Luther King I only knew the MBB though- literally wrote two vague paragraphs about the aftermath (essentially 'he was involved in lots of marches... and... then... unfortunately was assassinated at some point').

Aragneer

That paper was amazing I am so very happy with it ^^ I'm surprised none of the predictions came up..was a bit annoyed by that and the irish questions were a weird selection but I did:

Patrick Pearse
Nazi characteristics
Martin Luther King

Muggwoffin

Firstly let me preface this by saying I was thrilled with the paper. Everything I studied came up. Now the rant;

This paper itself is diabolical. The timing is ridiculous and as AdamD said the paper is largely about quantity, this exam rewards the speed writer over the ardent learner. If everyone was given just a half hour extra then people could truly show how much they know, or indeed how little they know. It would actually be fair. What he have now is a paper that forces the student to compromise and cut out parts that they have learned and sacrifice their knowledge to timing. I would totally agree with this approach if historians worldwide were forced to pump out dissertations in evenings but the fact is, they are not. The crazy timing of the exam does not accurately display the knowledge of the candidate nor does it reflect the true nature of the study of history. I was going to do history at third level but the thought of trying to fit in the totality of any topic of history into a tiny time span fills me with dread.

State Examinations Commission History division, if you are reading this, you are a bunch of gits.

robw09

if you did the democracy question 1922-32 should you have mentioned the industrial changes and emphasis on Agriculture along with army mutiny and that ?

C__MC

Gav77 wrote: »

Just wrote about the economy, shipbuilding, textiles etc...that is pretty much the war though so just wrote from 39-45...welfare state and that! Didnt really know anything from 32-39! what you write??

Pretty much the same bud!!

krisityfer

I did the 1870-1914 Irish section, and holy **** it was horrendous. Three topics I knew nothing about, and my Home Rule question was a mere 2 pages of bull about the 85-86 elections...
Was really pleased with Nation States and International Tensions questions, and there was one WW2 question I could do well.
Apprentice boys 40 mark question was doable, I thought.

Shame I suck at history...

randylonghorn

AdamD wrote: »

For the most part, it is actually quantity.

No, it's not.

History is a paper where people *will* end up writing a lot more, admittedly, to cover everything they need to cover ... it's the nature of the beast, even at third level.

But the quality is still the important thing.

Meller

SDTimeout wrote: »

Did anybody attempt turning a Sinn Fein question into the Arthur Griffith Q ?

Yeah, basically. I knew an essay about the factors leading to Sinn Féin's success in 1918, as well as an essay about the Treaty negotiations, so just combined the two.

Muggwoffin, I do agree, it's a pity. Definitely quanity > quality, without a doubt. I'm a slow writer and was v. pleased to get 4 pages out of all my essays today- I know the quality was fairly poor, but in the mock it was obvious that the longer essays got more marks than the well-structured, well-written ones (as long as they weren't absolutely dreadful).

AdamD

randylonghorn wrote: »

No, it's not.

History is a paper where people *will* end up writing a lot more, admittedly, to cover everything they need to cover ... it's the nature of the beast, even at third level.

But the quality is still the important thing.

Even if somebody's 4 page essay is of a slightly higher standard than another's 5 page essay, the 5 page essay will get a higher mark. Assuming the quality is of a decent standard, it becomes quantity. Though it can also be said that if people are writing a decent amount of quantity it becomes about quality. But more often than not its the quantity that kills many people who are actually good at the subject.

SDTimeout

Also, i personally mucked up my time management on the Nazi question. Leaving me only time to write three lines on my 40 marker in Documents because i figured even thought i didn't know the irish topic as well. I would pick up more marks attempting 2 pages at a topic i know a little about then a 40 mark question like APP boys on something i know nothing about.

LC2010HIS

The worst history exam I ever sat in my life



So disappointed.. horrendous paper cant stop crying....